It’s all kicking off in Bristol

[Hades]

We have no idea who will be running the country in another few elections. Maybe the current parties can be trusted with the new laws. But even if they can then we have to protect against dreaconian laws being used unfairly in the future. Think of someone you hate. Think of someone who hates you. Think of someone who has very undesirable political views. Now imagine them in a position of power. Would you be happy for them to have these powers?

Writing to your local MP does as much good nowadays as a parliamentary petition. i.e. It's usually ignored but gives the illusion that people have a voice.

I'm not supporting violent protest at all. But I do support the right to peaceful protest even on matters I don't agree with. It's a fundamental part of freedom of speech.

 

[Ahleckz]

Police had enough resources, they decided not to intervene and were quoted saying that many times. Don't try and turn this into a funding issue, because it not.

It's been two tier policing, groups even slightly right leaning get full riot gear and the extreme left get police and politicians kneeling for them. I have no sympathy for the police at this point.

Yes, you’re right. When a bunch of Rangers hooligans, with history of nazi salutes, assaulting minorities and general thuggery, trash a cities central square, destroy shops and intimidate members of the public going around their normal business they get watched by the police with no intervention and very little arrests.

When a group protest about male violence, they get arrested, batoned and dragged away by the police.

Oh wait, you’re not right.

Ultimately we could pick and choose situations to suit our argument but your suggestion that the ‘right’ (or thugs, as most of those breaking the law probably are) see police intervention more than the ‘left’ (or again, thugs) is utter nonsense.

Stop trying to make this political, and create more division. You get thugs on both sides, the issue here ought to be about this absurd bill.

ultimately Stop making stuff up, you’re making a fool of yourself.

 

[deuse]

I don't think the rude remark was required - I reckon he is referring to the fact that "It is highly decentralized and comprises an array of autonomous groups".

It was not a rude remark.
We say that where I come from all the time.

And please don't speak for other people. You will sound like a SJW and I wouldn't want that.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

It was not a rude remarke.
We say that where I come from all the time.

And please don't speak for other people. You will sound like a JSW.

Good chat, thanks for the enlightenment

P.s. what is a remarke and a JSW? Were you so viciously completing that post you just mashed the keys in excitement?

 

[deuse]

Good chat, thanks for the enlightenment

P.s. what is a remarke and a JSW? Were you so viciously completing that post you just mashed the keys in excitement?

I said you would sound like a SJW

"I don't think the rude remark was required - I reckon he is referring to the fact that "It is highly decentralized and comprises an array of autonomous groups".

I don't speak for other people as I don't know what they are thinking at that time

 

[Deleted User 298457]

I said you would sound like a SJW

"I don't think the rude remark was required - I reckon he is referring to the fact that "It is highly decentralized and comprises an array of autonomous groups".

I don't speak for other people as I don't know what they are thinking at that time

Have you ever been in a discussion with more than one person?

 

[Deleted member 77746]

The law was already sufficiently robust for that.

Not sure what the problem is then.

 

[LeMson]

when was the last successful protest in this country that achieved its aim? The Poll tax in 1990? Gotta break a few eggs an all that

 

[Lysander]

I'll have to read up to inform myself more about this bill, but the looks of last night, I couldn't think of a better argument for it.

People should have the rights to protest, absolutely, that is vital to a free society, but this kind of thing is disgraceful. A lot of people will come out with the "slippery slope" argument but I don't think that that holds water here. In fact, I don't think it's held water a lot of times historically. It's hard-right "free speech"-spouter's drivel.

EDIT: Irony as the Daily Mail suspends comments on their article.

 

[Uther]

when was the last successful protest in this country that achieved its aim? The Poll tax in 1990? Gotta break a few eggs an all that

Do you think breaking the bones of a police officer and throwing things at horses will help their cause in any way?
I suspect the opposite to now happen.

 

[deuse]

Have you ever been in a discussion with more than one person?

Oh no. You're one of them.....runs away...

The only time I have ever heard someone talk for someone else, was when twins was talking about the Salt tax.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Oh no. You're one of them.....runs away...

As opposed to dropping a link with a derogatory comment?

 

[VincentHanna]

when was the last successful protest in this country that achieved its aim? The Poll tax in 1990? Gotta break a few eggs an all that

Literally last year when the Government had to do yet another U-turn on students grades being decided by an algorithm?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ent-hyde-park-grades-university-a9671916.html

 

[fez]

I don't understand the point in writing to MP's when they slavishly follow the party line.

If Brexit has taught us anything it is that they perhaps don't anymore. Regardless of whether they ultimately fall in line, if enough people write to their MPs then perhaps those in power might realise how unpopular a policy is and that popularity = elections.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

So if 1000 people turned up to a Tommy Robinson rally you wouldn't call them all racist Nazis?

Tommy Robinson dislikes Islamic fundamentalists (especially terrorists) and has been subjected to racist abuse both physical and verbally for trying to expose Islam for what it is.

Apparently you're now a racist nazi for speaking the truth against the religion of peace.

You may want to watch Tommy Robinson's Oxford union address on YouTube. Yes the same Oxford currently saving the world with a not for profit vaccine gave Tommy Robinson his own slot to address their members.

It's great to jump on bandwagons and I suspect yes a lot of his followers may be racists but Tommy himself is actually trying to tackle a real problem in this country which spreads worldwide.

I'd like to know how many folk have actually listened to his Oxford union address rather than just read what's spouted about him in the tabloid's. As we already know the media has its own agenda to promote hatred and fear. To form an opinion on him based just off tabloid gossip would be ignorant. I used to think he was a racist too until I actually heard his views but I don't think he hates black people or think they are beneath him. In fact a lot of his friends are black the media has portrayed him in this light.

So to answer your question no I wouldn't call them all racist Nazis. Only some of them will fall into that category and Tommy cannot exactly control who follows him and it's the media which has made that type of person become a follower of his rather than Tommy himself by promoting him as a racist.

Again Tommy doesn't shed himself in good light by supporting count Dackula or whatever that idiots name was but his agenda isn't racist although it may look that way to everyone who has never actually listened to him.

Bare in mind this is Oxford university here. Do you really think they would entertain a racist and give him the platform to amass 3 million views on this video alone?

I'm not a supporter of his but I do believe that he has been shone in a very bad light for his beliefs which are that Islam is an intolerant religion which tbh is true.

Before anyone responds it would be helpful if they actually listened to him for once rather than media gossip. I've made it easy by embedding the video above.

 

[VincentHanna]

If Brexit has taught us anything it is that they perhaps don't anymore.

You know the result was 52/48% right?

Were they supposed to ignore pretty much half of their constituents?

 

[ebilcake]

Yes, you’re right. When a bunch of Rangers hooligans, with history of nazi salutes, assaulting minorities and general thuggery, trash a cities central square, destroy shops and intimidate members of the public going around their normal business they get watched by the police with no intervention and very little arrests.

When a group protest about male violence, they get arrested, batoned and dragged away by the police.

Oh wait, you’re not right.

Ultimately we could pick and choose situations to suit our argument but your suggestion that the ‘right’ (or thugs, as most of those breaking the law probably are) see police intervention more than the ‘left’ (or again, thugs) is utter nonsense.

Stop trying to make this political, and create more division. You get thugs on both sides, the issue here ought to be about this absurd bill.

ultimately Stop making stuff up, you’re making a fool of yourself.

 

[Raikiri]

Oh, hear they come, the denialists and massive blind spots.

If you're asking for examples for things that should be obvious then I'm not wasting time on you.

So that's a "no", then.

Not sure what the problem is then.

That they're trying to introduce additional laws that could see people harshly punished for simply using their right to peacefully protest.

 

[deuse]

As opposed to dropping a link with a derogatory comment?

Asked and answered

And trying to make a big thing out of nothing proves I was right to run way.
Have fun and keep safe.

 

[VincentHanna]

Posts laughing meme, won't post evidence of claim requested by lots of different people.